House Hearing On Obama's Unilateral Action To Cease Enforcing Laws - Live Webcast

The House Judiciary Committee is about to discuss what it calls “The President’s Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws,” focusing on the Obamacare delays, enforcement of immigration laws, and more. As Mediaite notes, the question of whether the president can take unilateral action to cease enforcing laws stretches back at least to last summer, when President Barack Obama said he would stop deporting young undocumented immigrants, an end-run around congressional refusal to pass the DREAM Act.

Executive orders have played a part in everything from the non-enforcement of the Defense of Marriage Act to the administration’s “fix” two weeks ago allowing insurance providers to renew policies cancelled after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

It seems the constitutional lawyers want to have their say in the "most transparent" administration ever.

He already took the mile. Now he's daring anyone to try to take it back. Nobody steps up, he takes 10 more.

See recent article talking about eliminating the 2 term limit for a President (a Constitutional Ammendment, last time I checked). The idea's already been floated, now they're just seeing how much push-back they get.

Putin has his loyal followers and fellow oligarchs' interests first. There's a reason why Moscow has the highest number of billionaires per capita, but the rest of the country is a 3rd world desolate hell hole.

the down arrows remind me of the time i said egypt's reset of their democratic process would be less violent than ours was. (what reset of ours, you ask? oh, let's see....ummm....yeah.... the 'civil' war.)

and springle in extortion with a dabs of lies and a hints of illegal use of taxpayer funds....

Fromer fbi director Louis Freeh (clinton) spoke at an event, at the conclusion, he was aksed if he believed there was still 3 fucntioning branches of government and if he did, could he provide examples. Louigi said yes but didn't provide any examples.

There's no reason to throw all these different things at Obama, other than the CONSTITUTION, which, if a simpleton like me is reading it right, says he can't use press conferences to announce he's going to change laws on a whim. Rather, laws are changed by CONGRESS.

EXACTLY Doc! There are multiple reasons why this guy should be impeached including Fast and Furrious, Libya, Bengazi, IRS Scandal, NSA Scandal, EO changing laws at will that he does not have the authority to do.

That brings up the other big question of an activist Supreme Court changing laws by decision not merely throwing them out over constitutionality. One could rightly argue that John Marshall as Chief Justice trampled over states rights and ushered in the supremacy of federal law and the era big government through "judicial review" a term he may have coined.

Get this... this morning Obama announces he's going to give money to insurance companies so they can cover costs to comply with his decision to allow cancelled policies to be reinstated. You're following this insanity so far, right?

So where's he get that money? Don't know, don't care. Just pulled it out of his stash (taxpayer pockets), I guess. Nobody even questioning if he has the authority. Just "announce and it becomes law."

I think Obama's setting a good example. I never liked the laws either. I'm a minarchist. If our dear leader won't enforce whatever he doesn't like, I won't follow whatever I don't like. Lawlessness begets lawlessness. And besides, I was tired a long time ago from paying taxes, so that will have to stop too with everything else... from jaywalking to not being allowed to pork the family dog in the southern states.

Even if the Senate would not convict, the House by beginning impeachment proceedings could subpoena all kinds of records and have all kinds of White House lackeys testify. The longer the list of criminal offenses, the more WH lackeys would take the fifth. His popular support would go even lower and he becomes ineffective. The basic high crimes(felonies)would be multiple violations of 18USC §371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States "If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
And 18USC §1031 - Major fraud against the United States "(a) Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, any scheme or artifice with the intent—
(1) to defraud the United States; or
(2) to obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises,
in any grant, contract, subcontract, subsidy, loan, guarantee, insurance, or other form of Federal assistance, including through the Troubled Asset Relief Program, an economic stimulus, recovery or rescue plan provided by the Government

The constitution means nothing if the regular citizen acts (that would imply taking ACTION) to invoke ones natural rights. Yea, it's a pain in the ass, freedom is hard on the front end easy on the back end, just the opposite with the others.

The bullshit's been stacking up in DC for decades but went off the charts 13 years ago give or take. I'd like to believe that after so fucking long that just maybe this would be the beginning of an awakening, but I'm sure it's just more theater.

Sorry let me get this straight....we have to have hearings on whether or not laws should be enforced? How 'bout we just scrap the entire system and start over, adhering to the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Or is that too much to ask.